Subject: [big campaign] "McCain gaffe on water rights could lose Colorado voters"
From: "David S. Bennahum" <[email-masked]>
To: Big Campaign <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2008 16:11:27 -0400
List-Id: <bigcampaign.googlegroups.com>

http://www.coloradoindependent.com/4741/mccain-gaffe-on-water-rights-could-lose-colorado-voters/

McCain gaffe on water rights could lose Colorado voters
By John Orr 8/18/08 10:12 AM

Did John McCain signal the end of his Republican presidential run and  
launch his next campaign for the U.S. Senate in a phone interview with  
The Pueblo Chieftain last week?

During the interview on Thursday, McCain called for a renegotiation of  
the Colorado River Compact. Colorado has nine Electoral College votes,  
and McCain’s statements could have pushed Colorado voters one more  
step away from him in the presidential election. At the very least the  
senator from Arizona provided a wedge issue for the Obama campaign to  
exploit here and across the southwestern United States.

Colorado has a ton of experience with water grabs. In his attempt to  
show his Western water chops, McCain wound up betraying his allegiance  
to Arizona water politics instead. Many in Arizona have opposed the  
Colorado River Compact since its adoption, and McCain was just  
parroting the party line. His position will win him votes in Arizona,  
but, judging by the reaction from politicians on both sides of the  
aisle in Colorado, he lost at least a few here. Both Republican  
senatorial candidate Bob Schaffer and Democratic Sen. Ken Salazar of  
Colorado reacted in terms of a fight to the death. Opposition doesn’t  
get much stronger than that.

Colorado water under stress
Renegotiate the Colorado River Compact? What were you thinking, Sen.  
McCain? This political season Coloradans are already feeling as though  
they are under siege from oil and gas developers and those hoping to  
exploit oil shale. Last week Coloradans witnessed the results of  
presidential policies you hope to continue — when the Bureau of Land  
Management leased the Roan Plateau — over the objections of most  
elected officials in the state. The catch is, Coloradans for the most  
part are not against development; we’re just hoping for responsible  
development. We’d like to be able to hook a cutthroat or two, or maybe  
bag that trophy elk, after the natural gas plays out. If oil shale is  
ever going to stop being the “next big thing” and actually help the  
nation toward a sustainable energy policy, it will require much of the  
water that is left to develop in Colorado. The same water you want for  
Arizona.

We’ve just come through a major drought, and eastern Colorado has been  
creeping silently back into drought for months now. Eastern Colorado  
depends mightily on water diverted across the Great Divide, from the  
Colorado River Basin, where you want to improve the Law of the River.

The Law of the River
By the early 1920s Los Angeles had already fully developed the water  
in its basin, but its population was exploding and it needed more  
water. The city subsequently dried up the Owens River Valley with an  
assist from the federal government. After developing water in the Mono  
Lake basin, it was eyeing the Colorado River, as were irrigators in  
Arizona and California.

The seven Colorado River Basin states (Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, New  
Mexico, Arizona, Nevada and California) realized the need to set down  
rules for the development of the Colorado River. The basin states  
crafted the Colorado River Compact to allocate the river’s water  
equitably so that each basin state could develop their water as  
needed, on its own timetable, without a rush to put it to beneficial  
use. The doctrine of prior appropriation — the legal basis for most  
water development in the West — holds that someone who puts water to  
beneficial use first gains a priority on the same volume of water,  
from the same diversion, when it comes around again in another water  
year. The compact allocated the water to provide certainty to the  
states over time.

What would a negotiation look like in the 21st century?
On Friday during a phone interview, Chris Treese from the Colorado  
River Water Conservation District asked, “What would a negotiation  
look like in the 21st century?” To get an idea, we can review the  
recent agreement among the basin states over management of the  
Colorado River during low water years, since the agreement dealt with  
a small subset of the issues that would come up in an attempt to  
renegotiate the compact.

It took 18 months to get the agreement. Seated at the table were the  
basin states, of course, but unlike the days when the Colorado River  
Compact was hammered out, there were many more groups present, all  
with legitimate concerns. Native American tribes, Reclamation, the  
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, power authorities, water utilities,  
irrigators and more all wanted a say, and many were allowed input. The  
landmark agreement — signed by Secretary of the Interior Dirk  
Kempthorne in December 2007 — dealtonly with the issues during dry  
years. Environmentalists didn’t get any relief from the agreement  
regarding water for endangered species or for the protection of the  
riparian environment. Attempts to simulate natural river flows were  
also not part of the agreement.

So, Sen. McCain, would the environment have a seat at the table in a  
renegotiation effort? Lake Mead, Lake Powell and the other dams across  
the entire basin — too numerous to list here — have had a hugely  
negative effect on the natural health of the Colorado River Basin. The  
natural cycle of floods moving sediment around, supporting the fauna  
that evolved with the river, is gone for all time. A few programs, for  
example the Colorado River Endangered Species Program, have been  
pretty successful but depend both on the certainty of the Colorado  
River Compact and water in the mainstem.

A renegotiation would probably require prioritization of water uses,  
perhaps a hierarchy of needs. What crops to grow? Irrigation, industry  
or suburbs? Continued unbridled growth or restraints on growth? Would  
a new compact eliminate out-of-basin transfers? Thedrying up of farms  
will continue — in Colorado and Arizona — to provide water to the  
cities and suburbs. What do we do for rural farming communities? The  
issues are legion.

Now in damage control mode
What does McCain’s statement show about his qualifications to lead the  
nation?

His campaign is now in damage-control mode, assuring Coloradans that  
our water rights would be protected in any case. So we know that he is  
prone to shoot from the hip and, in a long campaign, make the mistake  
of robotically answering a question on water in a way that has  
probably earned him applause as he campaigned around Arizona. Write it  
up to the campaign grind.

On the other hand, a renegotiation of the Colorado River Compact is  
tactical. It might result from a serious analysis of water issues, but  
other ideas should be considered as well. McCain, as president, would  
not be able to make that call. He would be compelled to rely on  
others. A president should set policy, not tactics. Could it be that  
McCain’s faux pas betrays something about his management style or  
inexperience as a manager?

Sen. McCain, if you were going to be wrong about something, this was a  
lucky choice. Being out of touch on Western water issues won’t hurt  
your presidential run in most of the country. Colorado is on the  
electoral fence, but you can’t be serious about winning here now. I  
bet ears perked up in Las Vegas though. They don’t have the abundance  
of water that Arizona has, and they may see you as being on their  
side. Good luck in November.

And about that next Senate run. I think you’re wise to have started now.

Denver-native John Orr is with Denver Public Works. He is the author  
of CoyoteGulch.net, the preeminent blog on water and environmental  
issues.

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "big campaign" group.

To post to this group, send to [email-masked]

To unsubscribe, send email to [email-masked]

E-mail [email-masked] with questions or concerns
 
This is a list of individuals. It is not affiliated with any group or organization.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---